Is there a way have a file only accessable by only one user at a time

Here's the question...
I want to set up a file so that it can only be accessed by only one person at a time - is there any way to do this?

Turn off fast user switching and autologin, making all users log off before other users can use the machine.

Similar Messages

  • HT1040 Is there a way to place an order with more than one item at a time? For example I am going to make a few books and have them all shipped to me.  Do I have to order and pay shipping for each one individually?

    Is there a way to place an order with more than one item at a time?  for example I am making a few books and having them all shipped to me.  Do I have to order each one separately and pay shipping each time?

    You have to order each book separately, if the books are different. Only multiple copies of the same book can be ordered in the same order, see here
    Regards
    Léonie

  • HT201250 Is there a way to back up only one folder (with a lot of sub folders) in time machine?

    Is there a way to back up only one folder (with a lot of sub folders)

    Then I recomend against using Time Machine.
    I suggest you check out Carbon Copy Cloner instead.
    Personally I see that as a false economy to not back up everything.
    Allan

  • 1. Does not start automatically  2. Only ONE user at a time

    When I plug the IPOD it should start iTunes automatically (I have the box checked) but it does not. Never has done that. I have the latest 7.1 version.
    Another pain in the rear is that only one user at a time can run iTunes. That stinks. If another user has it open you MUST log off, stop them, log on. They ought to make this work for all users as other windows pro rams do. If it is doing NOTHING with the library then I ought to be able to use it.

    That may be true but it is a real pain since when it happens the only way to recover is to terminate all of the iTunes modules with task manager and start it manually. It also leaves the IPOD in a state that says do not disconnect. You can disconnect since nothing is really happening but there is no excuse for this not to start much faster. When you have multiple users it is a real pain. It ought to be able to either end when finished or better yet allow multiple users simultaneously updating from different libraries.
    I guess i will just have to get in the habit of treating it as a single user and start and stop it every time I need it and be suer not to let it run. Not nice because that means waiting for larger Podcast downloads instead of having there ready for me when I sign on my computer.

  • Only one user at the time can execute VE01 (due to blockage of VEIAV)

    Hi,
    As I understand it only one user at the time can execute VE01 (or MEIS for arrivals). If someone is already executing the VE01 transaction the error-message "Table VEIAV is blocked by user XX" appears. It does not matter if one tries to execute it for different legal entities - no parallel processing seems to be possible.
    This is a huge limitation for a global concern with many entities operating in the same SAP instance. Does anyone recognize this problem and are there any ways to get around it? It does not make sense that dispatches (VE01) and arrivals (MEIS) cannot be executed for several organizational units at the same time in parallel?
    Thanks in advance,
    Mats Hansson

    yes I know this problem.
    One should not maintain much thru this transaction.
    for me it is not more than an emergency transaction, as it is not really more than table maintenance thru SM30
    You should investigate what entries/changes the users have to make.
    Limit these manual entries by having better data in the system, so that SAP can itself create the entries for this table.
    Organize more, less users , maybe just one per company who shall maintain VEFU manually.
    Train them to prepare their entries before they start using VEFU.
    Explain that they should leave VEFU as soon as possible as the block other users.
    assign maintenance windows to the users.

  • Concurrent program to be submitted y only one user at a time

    Hi
    I have an issue with one of my reports. The report is using temporary tables, those will under go insertion and deletion while the report is running. So, to make sure that two or more concurrent requests submitted for same report, will not conflict, I want to make my concurrent request to be submitted by only one user at a time.
    How can I do that?
    Any help is appreciated.
    Thanks
    BalaKrishna

    The "run alone" box should not be checked. This indicates that this program can only run when no others are running. Pl see MOS Doc 1078462.6 (Custom SQL Concurrent Program Returns NO MANAGER Error). This option should typically not be used.
    To be able to achieve what you need, set the incompatibility (as you have done) and then bounce the concurrent managers for the setting to take effect. Pl see these MOS Docs
    436186.1 - Cannot Make Concurrent Programs Incompatible With Itself
    142944.1 - How to Make a Concurrent Program Incompatible with Itself
    HTH
    Srini

  • Only one user at a time

    I'm looking for help.
    I have two user accounts on my iMac. Both have their own iTunes library file but these both reference to a shared store of music files (to avoid duplicates). I would now like to move this shared music to an external HDD attached to my TC.
    My problem is this. If user 1 first accesses the external HDD then when user 2 tries to do so there is a little red icon on the folder and permission is denied. If I disconnect all users from the TC and then retry with user 2 the problem is reversed. It seems to me that only one user account is allowed to access a TC external HDD at a time. Is there any way around this?
    In case anybody asks, my reason for moving the files is that I am hoping to buy a Sonos music system, which can read iTunes music from the TC as though it were an NAS, even if the computer is off.

    I think you're being misled a bit by the interface: the checkbox labelled "Strict locking" doesn't just allow strict locking, it requires it (and thus disallows byte-range locking). That is, with strict locking enabled, any client that tries to lock any part of the file actually locks the entire file. Access normally depends on byte-range locking to allow different clients to share the database (as long as they aren't trying to modify the same part of it at the same time), but with strict locking the first client locks all others out.

  • Only one user at a time can log in per client

    Server: 10.6.2
    Client: 10.5.8
    The share point on the server is the default of /Users. Home directories are configured as /Network/Severs/hostname/Users/username. In the "Home" tab of each user, the home directory shows up as "afp://hostname/Users", which is the default when creating a user.
    On a given client, only one user can log in at a time. If the first user switches to the login screen without logging out (fast user switching), when the second user attempts to log in, they get an error "You are unable to log in to account "xxxx" at this time."
    Looking in the secure.log, the error appears to be "file busy":
    Mar 7 12:13:39 G4-MDD authorizationhost[677]: ERROR | -[HomeDirMounter mountNetworkHomeWithURL:attributes:dirPath:username:] | PremountHomeDirectoryWithAuthentication( url=afp://Mini.local/Users, homedir=/Network/Servers/Mini.local/Users/xxxxxx, name=xxxxxx ) returned 16
    The server's /Users directory is mounted. It appears to be trying to automount another copy, rather than use the existing mount.
    How do I resolve this so multiple users can be logged in at one time? Surely I don't have to create a share point for each user?

    I'm glad to hear I'm not the only one encountering this problem, although the fact that this problem has apparently existed for some time is mind boggling to me. The idea that there is some data corruption issue here is not a valid concern. We did this all the time on Linux in my previous life. There is no need to unmount the mounted directory, at least in the default case. The mount point is /Users. Home directories on the server are /Users/fred and /Users/sally. Automounter mounts /Users at the mount point /Network/Servers/serverhostname/Users. Fred is logged in and can access /Users/fred. Now Sally wants to log in. /Users is already mounted. There is no reason to unmount/remount /Users. OS X can see it is already mounted. Just log Sally in - she already has full access to her files.
    If Fred and Sally reside on different servers, then there would be different mount points /Network/Servers/hostname/Users - again no conflict in the mount points.
    The only solution I can see right now is a separate share point for each user, which is unacceptable. That might work for my two users. It's hardly scalable from a maintenance standpoint.
    I do have the problem of fred logging out and sally not being able to get in right away, but that period is probably less than a minute. Wait a minute, then sally can log in.

  • Only one user at a time allowed to open MS Access database on a Mac share

    I have an issue trying to open a Microsoft Access database from our Mac OS X Server running on XServe.
    The MS Access file is stored on a Share Point on the XServe. Windows XP clients open the database. The problem is that it will only allow one user at a time to open the file. The has previously been operating fine when it was stored on a Windows server.
    The Group's permissions for this Share Point allow Read & Write.
    Any thoughts would be much appreciated.

    I think you're being misled a bit by the interface: the checkbox labelled "Strict locking" doesn't just allow strict locking, it requires it (and thus disallows byte-range locking). That is, with strict locking enabled, any client that tries to lock any part of the file actually locks the entire file. Access normally depends on byte-range locking to allow different clients to share the database (as long as they aren't trying to modify the same part of it at the same time), but with strict locking the first client locks all others out.

  • Is there a way to protect files from access of the users? (No cxt or dxr method).

    I need to have a lot of files under several directory.
    I need also to allow the projector to access the directory but not for the users..
    I cant' in this case to make an extenal cxt or dxr file.
    Is there e way to prevent the acces to directory, end/or file, by the users?
    Thanks.

    No. The Camera Connection Kit (USB and SD Card adapter) if used for import only. There is no way to save to an external device natively.

  • Issue with QuickVPN on SA520 - only one user at a time?

    Currently, whenever we have multiple users attempt to VPN in - the first user gets in fine, however, any subsequent user is able to connect but repeatedly receives the message that they are unable to communicate with the network, would you like to wait.  I'd like to be able to have more than one user connected concurrently to the VPN - any help would be greatly appreciated.

    Hi:
    Thanks for reporting the issue.  Please let us know which OS you are using that is experiencing this problem.
    If you are using Window 7 and/or Vista, we already have a fix in our next release image 1.1.62 (MR2).
    It would be release soon, either end of this week or early next week.
    If you need it earlier, please let me know, I can PM you with a private image.
    Thanks,
    Charles

  • Is there a way to lock transparent pixels for more than one layer at a time?

    I've tried selecting multiple layers to modify but the lock transparent pixels box becomes greyed out once I've selected more than one layer. Apologies in advance if this is deemed to be a stupid question but it would be greatly appreciated if someone knows of a solution. It would be very handy for some of the projects I'm currently developing.
    Thanks.

    I have not had a problem in Photoshop CC 2014 as long as I selected a layer with transparency, in my case the gray checkerboard. The button would dim if I selected an adjustment layer.

  • Is there a way to Move files to the iCloud thus freeing up disk space on my Mac? Or does iCloud only sync (replicate) files between my Mac and the cloud?

    Is there a way to Move files to the iCloud thus freeing up disk space on my Mac? Or does iCloud only sync (replicate) files between my Mac and the cloud? I want to free up disk space on my Mac and assumed that the icloud would be a good way to do this, but having 'moved' 70Gb of files to the iCloud drive (I've upgraded to 200Gb storage) my Mac is still nearly full and I've realised that it seems to just Sync files just like dropbox.

    So, the big question is did the Apple guys confirm that this is how the new iCloud drive should be working?  I'm guessing, from your response, that this is indeed the case.  Are they going to fix this anytime soon?  I thought that this was a new function of the iCloud drive in Yosemite.
    I just want an online storage facility to back up my photo & music collections.  I did look at Dropbox as they have a good deal going with their Dropbox Pro, however this is still just a sync service where the Master files reside on your local disk drive - although I have read that there may be a way to work around this.  Still not ideal.

  • HT201077 Is there a way to delete files locally, on iPad, after they have been backed up in iCloud, without losing any files?

    Is there a way to delete files locally, on iPad, after they have been backed up in iCloud, without losing any files? Because iCloud is seeming like it actually doesn't back up anything.. Just clogs up all storage space on every device with duplicate images/videos. I am looking for a delete when backed up feature. Does that exist?

    quote:
    Originally posted by:
    Michael Hager
    The problem with any boxed software is that the developers
    can NEVER know how every possible customer will use the software.
    That's why, as a developer, they need to make
    the software have MANY more checkboxes in the options screen to
    allow the user to use the software the way they need to, not the
    way the developers THINK they will need to. Just look at Microsoft
    as a poor example of this--I am never so frustrated as when trying
    to use ANY of their Office products, which make easy tasks
    difficult and do not include some of the most common options that
    competing products have.
    quote:
    The Dreamweaver check out system actually works very well if
    it’s set up properly and administered strictly. If you set it
    up on your testing server with everyone set up on their work
    stations correctly it will tell you who has a file locked for
    editing. Once everyone is working as a team with good supervision
    and division of tasks under a strict policy set by management,
    Dreamweaver will work very well for your purposes. You
    shouldn’t have to lock and unlock files manually since the
    check in-check out function will do it for you nicely. When you are
    satisfied that all is well with the site or particular pages, then
    someone in a managing position can release or authorize release to
    the live site.
    The problem is that I am the only person using
    DW in the organization, everyone else is using Frontpage...blah...
    You and Murray have both alluded to a separate "testing"
    server. Perhaps I can make this system work by setting up the
    testing server as a duplicate of the development server in my site
    manager. Then I would have to manually publish the files from the
    testing server to the live production server myself. What a pain!!!
    I can not believe that I am the only person in the world that has a
    setup like this -- it seems very common to me. I would assume most
    government organizations are set up identically as us.
    <sigh>

  • Is there a way to attach files into a Captivate Project like Adobe Presenter?

    All,
    There are things I like about Adobe Presenter and things I like better in Adobe Captivate.  Is there a way to attach files like spreadsheets, PDFs, and Word documents in Adobe Captivate like you can in Adobe Presenter?  It is real easy to do and I find it hard to imagine tha Captivate does not have an easy mechanism for doing this unlike Adobe Presenter which does it naturally.
    I am working on a project that has a complicated Table of Contents that Adobe Presenter cannot handle (yet Articulate works creates TOCs without any issue).  All the slides visible or none or lack of grouping options are not accpetable.  So I am redoing this in Captivate.  For the most part I am having no issues with the TOC but the point of this little project is to disseminate a spreadsheet to audience members that care to download it.  Here is where Presenter is better since it is real simple to do this.  Am I just lost in Captivate or do I need to do something "un-godly" complicated for a simple task?
    Mike

    Hi Mike,
    I'm using Presenter too, not only Captivate. Use Presenter often as wrapper for CP-movies (if I do not need the right click functionality). And I agree: some aspects are more attractive in Presenter (thinking about the Notes panel, the automatic adaption of the languages...). But you have to miss grouping in the TOC, and for real eLearning with interactivity, branching, I go for Captivate.
    If you want some features transferred to Captivate, why not filling in a feature request? The form is on the main page of these forums.
    Just wanted to help you. The action 'Open URL or File' is not that complicated to use.
    Lilybiri

Maybe you are looking for